Augusta Antonia

[quote name='Don Fernando' date='12 March 2010 - 12:12 AM' timestamp='1268371092' post='2223039'] What honest response were you looking for? And your sure instead of trying to construe something on here, you couldn't have just as easily came into our IRC, as posted previously, and talked to one of us / our Gov? [/quote] As my alliance has nothing whatsoever to do with Poison Clan why 1. Would I bother? and 2. Would YOU bother speaking to me?

[quote name='Rush Sykes' date='12 March 2010 - 12:05 AM' timestamp='1268370656' post='2223025'] Think back to a time...When you were in another alliance...who...launched an unprovoked on an unprotected, untreatied alliance. Later admitting to your a very close ally that you had no CB, and you just did it because you could, and nobody would care. Then Tela was part of a peace negotiation. Terms we agreed on. The offending alliance honored zero of the terms, despite repeated efforts on the afflicted alliance's part. Then said afflicted alliance got a protectorate from the fine folks in Athens, and not wanting to create an immediate issue for our protectors, with a global war on the horizon, just let it go. Its not even about those terms anymore. Its about watching the sanctimonious ramblings of people who were a part of that debacle, espousing about "doing what is right." It sickens me to see it, and it sickens me even more to see people supporting these people. [/quote] Ahhh the FINAL situation...I myself was 1. Not AE government at the time and had NO control over what AE's government did or said. 2. Never, EVER stated there was no CB and 3. I do not know WHAT FINAL told you but I know several people DID pay FINAL, myself being one of them. It sickens me that YOU do not want the past brought up in reference to PC yet you bring up a 2+ year old incident. Oh well...

[quote name='Don Fernando' date='12 March 2010 - 12:02 AM' timestamp='1268370440' post='2223021'] As I said, friends are friends, allies are allies, and enemies enemies. As far as I see it, not many peoples attitudes towards us have changed. We have completely changed our government since greenacres was around, yet people (not all thank god), have seen us in the same light. So I'm gonna go back to doing what I do, I assume you will to. Have fun playing poke the dead horse you are trying to beat. (P.S. - It's dead) [/quote] So commenting on a current and obvious situation is poking a dead horse? Hmmm and here I thought I might actually get some sort of honest response from your alliance on the topic rather than a vapid attempt to sweep things under the rug as if they never occurred. Alas, another hope dashed...

[quote name='Don Fernando' date='11 March 2010 - 11:54 PM' timestamp='1268370011' post='2223012'] I don't really see us handling our business in our way, in good time, as a good show, in good faith, and being fair seeing as what has transpired, what bad PR is there. In all honesty, our friend are our friends, allies our allies, enemies enemies, ect. Nothing is new, and new friends were gained in the process. Did you gain something from trying to bring down the resolution of so many peoples good time the past few days? [/quote] What bad PR?? Really??? REALLY???

[quote name='Rush Sykes' date='11 March 2010 - 11:52 PM' timestamp='1268369867' post='2223006'] Coming from someone who served in government of an alliance that totally renegged on agreed terms(ironically enough, negotiated by Tela on AE's behalf at the time), this is pretty rich. I suppose that restitution only matters, and is the only important thing, if it serves your own agenda. [/quote] Please elaborate??? I'm honestly not sure what you're referencing...

[quote name='Schad' date='11 March 2010 - 11:49 PM' timestamp='1268369679' post='2223001'] If that's the case, is it a bad thing? Better that alliances respond to public pressure if a mistake is made and correct it than they don't. [/quote] Oh I completely agree, however it's utter foolishness to applaud PC for doing what they should have done to begin with as if they are being righteous rather than caving to public pressure...Call it for what it is, not for what PC & Company's PR spin wants it to be seen as...

Glad to see SBA will be taken care of, but seriously...people congratulating PC and "good show" etc...come on...it's plaintively obvious that the ONLY reason PC is making good on reps to SBA is because of all the bad PR they received. Anyone who thinks otherwise or pretends it is for any reason other than that is living in the proverbial land of make believe...

[quote name='Rey the Great' date='11 March 2010 - 06:10 PM' timestamp='1268349339' post='2222547'] I double !@#$@#$ dog dare you to try a move on PC.[/quote] TY for that! I lol'd. Seriously though, I said nothing about making a move on anyone, I was merely hoping that the justification would be more than a "do something" or "noU" reply. *shrug*

[quote name='Caffine1' date='11 March 2010 - 05:47 PM' timestamp='1268347951' post='2222519']Yesterday alone, two of Poison Clan's tech raid targets were first strike nuked.[/quote] Since when did tech raids involve nuking? I can't wait to see the justification from PC and their *friends*. Should be an interesting story...I'd wager akin to one starting off "Come and listen to a story 'bout a man named Jed..."

[quote name='Tick1' date='11 March 2010 - 11:53 AM' timestamp='1268326753' post='2222200'] Yes, AirMe they've taken a lot of time in private to get this matter resolved. The fact is Echelon has been doing the same thing as C&G and TOP, requesting outrageous terms. We've all seen how well doing that will get things done.[/quote] Asking for 25% of damages (not for themselves, but for SBA) is "outrageous terms"??? lolwut...

[quote name='Tick1' date='11 March 2010 - 11:36 AM' timestamp='1268325721' post='2222184'] The games mechanics can't recognize the differencee between the upper case and lower case 'P,'[/quote] And this is where the logic and intelligence of human players comes into effect...That is if said human players possess such qualities...

[quote name='AirMe' date='10 March 2010 - 07:40 PM' timestamp='1268268356' post='2221517'] FFS, I will give 5 of my aid slots for that if PC is that hard up for slots. So there, I just offered to pay 15 mil of the 100 mil that was on the table.[/quote] I'll match that AirMe. So now we're up to 30 million of the 100 million. Anyone else care to jump in?

[quote name='Master-Debater' date='10 March 2010 - 11:35 AM' timestamp='1268239269' post='2220993']You can all bet your @#$% that if different alliances were involved then the moral outrage would be huge. If this were, say, IRON raiding a group of nations protected by, oh say, Sparta then everyone here would be calling for blood. It’s pretty easy to see the blatant hypocrisy going on here. What if Athens were the protector? MK? A simple change in the alliances would result in the moralist neo-hegemony demanding blood.[/quote] Well said MD. You beat me to it, you hit the nail on the head. All the semantics that have been tossed about by the neo-hegemony side boils down to one thing (which btw several posters have outright stated): Hatred of Echelon. Plain and simple.

ZOMG!! y0 mama comments on CN??? On IRC??? Say it isn't so!!! What is Bob coming to? Seriously, "noU" and "I #%@&ed your Mom" etc are probably the 2 most commonly used comments on IRC. To take either (in this case the Mom comment) as OOC is just ridiculous. Get a helmet...really...

[quote name='Mathias' date='31 January 2010 - 10:44 PM' timestamp='1264995874' post='2149436'] "10. Should Caffine1 rejoin Echelon he is permanently banned from holding any government position within the alliance." I'd really like to see you e-lawyer your way out of the word "permanent." [/quote] 5 pages of Echelon's announcement that they had fulfilled terms http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=70866&hl=neo%20anglia&st=0 and NO ONE (including GOD, MK and other KARMA alliances) had anything to say concerning # 10. I understand the fact that "permanent" was used in the terms, however I also have seen logs from numerous KARMA alliances saying Echelon had been completely released from terms...without any stipulations... Maybe KARMA is the one in need of an E-lawyer?

The fact remains, as was pointed out numerous times, that Echelon fulfilled the terms they were put under. When they were released from terms, as was also pointed out, it was not stipulated "all but one" (aka no Caffine in government). That being the case, what is the big deal? I have yet to see anyone who opposes Echelon's decision in this thread address those facts.

[quote name='x Tela x' date='31 January 2010 - 06:16 PM' timestamp='1264979796' post='2148565']Also, Delta, I really don't think RIA was a consideration. We pretty much know that RIA aren't a bunch of douchebags. It's your allies that would have blocked it. [/quote] Agreed. RIA are pretty good folks. RDD's experience fighting against them in the Karma war was about as pleasurable as fighting in a war can be.

[quote name='Delta1212' date='31 January 2010 - 06:12 PM' timestamp='1264979532' post='2148554'] I should point out that I stated earlier in the thread that had Echelon come to us, requested the term be dropped, and then come and posted this, then the tone of the topic would be at least somewhat justified instead of farcical. Edit: And I realize that doesn't really address the post I quoted, but it harkens back to earlier in this line of conversation. [/quote] Delta ah well see, after the first 7 pages earlier I just got tired of seeing the same thing posted over and over so alas I probably missed your original explanation (laziness ftw? lol) Thanks for the clarification

[quote name='Matthew Conrad' date='31 January 2010 - 06:12 PM' timestamp='1264979520' post='2148553'] Exactly, you know what they say about making assumptions You basically asked him to elaborate when he already elaborated. Actually, people have been trying to elaborate through this whole thread. There was really no point in that post. [/quote] LOL no assumption...your implication was rather clear. :EDIT: Typing fail

[quote name='Matthew Conrad' date='31 January 2010 - 06:04 PM' timestamp='1264979044' post='2148538'] Why, I see you've been practicing the art of taking words out of other peoples' mouths. Hey, why don't you point me to where I said anything you just accused me of saying. No really, point me to it. [/quote] Well Matthew..."He was in a position of know and [u][b]says[/b][/u] the terms would have been dropped if Echelon tried to work with them." No, you did not SAY exactly that just because someone says it is true that it must be, but you sure did imply it. *shrug*

[quote name='Matthew Conrad' date='31 January 2010 - 05:45 PM' timestamp='1264977942' post='2148502'] What is there really to elaborate on. He was in a position of know and says the terms would have been dropped if Echelon tried to work with them. Unless you've got any groundbreaking evidence to the contrary, there's nothing else to say but to say you're incorrect. [/quote] Ah I see! So just because someone says something that makes it true (which it may or may not be) and there is no further discussion allowed? I'll have to remember that for future reference. Thanks!

[quote name='Delta1212' date='31 January 2010 - 05:41 PM' timestamp='1264977717' post='2148494'] No one that wrote that term is still in their positions. No one left cares. Some surrender terms have been enforced rather rigidly historically. Many if not most undergo some level of renegotiation later. In this instance, with the primary concerned parties gone, we have no reason to deny a request to remove the term. [/quote] Again refer to my previous post "things do not ALWAYS follow traditional and predictable courses, but usually they do..." Also, if no one left cares then why bother posting on this at all? Just let it go...

[quote name='Delta1212' date='31 January 2010 - 05:35 PM' timestamp='1264977321' post='2148483'] You are mistaken. [/quote] Way to elaborate!

I find it amusing how everyone says the condition could have been dropped at any given time, as I highly doubt that is the case. If it could have been dropped so easily by "just asking" it wouldn't have been put in place to begin with. Granted, as has been stated, many of those who negotiated the surrender terms are no longer in gov, I still doubt that their respective alliances would have wanted to bend on said terms so quickly and easily given the enforcement of previous terms through the ages on Planet Bob. Maybe I am mistaken, as things do not ALWAYS follow traditional and predictable courses, but usually they do...

o/ Echelon! Good show indeed! Solidus